Year: 2006

Blogger Jason Kottke has given up on trying to make a living by blogging full time.

Kottke announced on Wednesday that he is no longer seeking payments from people who enjoy his blog, Kottke.org. He said he hasn’t managed to attract enough readers or developed “a sufficient cult of personality” to support the subscription model.

He also explained that he wasn’t able to keep providing the time and energy needed to make his blog successful enough.

“My (unstated) intention from the beginning was to approach the site as a start-up, but along the way, life intervened (in a good way), and I couldn’t focus on it as much as I wanted to. The site became a normal job, a 9-to-5 affair, which meant that I could keep up with it, but growth was hard to come by,” Kottke wrote.

Kottke made decent money, at least the first couple of months, but after that things got a little lean.

Kottke revealed on Wednesday that he had raised a total of $39,900 from 1,450 donors. Most of that was received in the initial fund-raising drive in February and March 2005, when his project began.

It’s unclear what Kottke will do next.

“In the short term, (the blog) is going to be taking a backseat to some other things going on in my life. Longer term, who knows? I might look for other ways to fund my efforts on the site, or maybe it goes back to being more of a hobby. But there will be posts and links and other things here almost daily, just like there have been for almost eight years now,” he wrote.

Let’s not kid ourselves – blogging takes a lot of time, not to mention commitment. What makes blogging even more difficult is the lack of payback, appreciation or even attention from blog readers. Often times, bloggers feel like they’re writing for themselves, a few friends and maybe mom. Other than that, bloggers gaze at their daily stats longingly, wondering who’s out there, when they’ll come back, and if they’ll stick around long enough to click on a sidebar ad.

But, we blog, constantly. We love it enough to show up every day, without fame and fortune. At least for now.

Cindy Sheehan’s not ready to retire her act just yet. She’s scheduled to bring her love to Germany next month to protest outside US military institutions. Sheehan and her entourage plan to construct another ‘Camp Casey’ style compound which will serve as temporary headquarters.

And how do the troops feel about a visit from Mother Sheehan?

“Anything I would have to say about her, you couldn’t print,” Army Staff Sgt. Mark Genthner said.

I would bet a majority agrees with Staff Sgt. Genthner.

Tell us again how you support the troops, Cindy.

Wow, that was fast. British cops arrested a man and a woman today in connection with that huge armed robbery. While the figure has changed depending on which report you read, the latest amount of stolen loot stands at 50 million pounds, or roughly 87 million US dollars.

“These arrests are a positive development in the early stages of our investigation,” Assistant Chief Constable Adrian Leppard said, adding the Kent force had already received more than 400 calls from people offering tips.

The robbery bore striking similarities to a 2004 robbery in Northern Ireland. Police blamed criminal gangs – not terrorists – and said the hunt continued for the other men.

“This is organized crime at its top level. This was planned and executed with military precision,” Leppard said of Wednesday’s heist in the sleepy market town about an hour’s drive from the Channel Tunnel, which separates England and France.

Just like a Hollywood movie.

The heat remains on high. Members of Congress have stepped up the pressure as the White House continues to defend its decision to allow a UAE company to takeover significant US port operations.

President Bush made the following comments today at the conclusion of a cabinet meeting:

“People don’t need to worry about security. The more people learn about the transaction that has been scrutinized and approved by my government,” Bush said, “the more they’ll be comforted that our ports will be secure.”

In order for more people to learn about the facts in this matter, the Bush administration will have to put itself a step ahead of the media. So far, they’ve been unable to do so as each day has brought more reactive responses rather than proactive.

Joe Gandelman has more.

Following the bombing of a sacred Shiite shrine, gunman shot 47 civilians, adding to the death toll since yesterday. So far, at least 111 people have died. This is a bad thing getting worse by the second.

I can’t help but wonder, what do we do now? The US definitely doesn’t want to be in the middle of a civil war. The big question is, are we witnessing just another short lived uprising or has a genuine civil war begun?

Iraq The Model is following the developments.

The Democrats best hope to hold onto a key House seat from Ohio couldn’t collect enough signatures to qualify for the party primary. You need 50 signatures for qualification. Sen. Charlie Wilson could only get 46.

“I am obviously disappointed with this decision today,” Wilson said. “I am exploring a number of options and am confident that, in November, I will be on the ballot and I will win the privilege and responsibility of representing Ohio families in Congress.”

The state Democratic party said it would back any number of potential legal or procedural challenges Wilson might pursue.

“He was a very strong, formidable candidate and there are options that would make him a strong candidate even if he doesn’t succeed legally,” state party spokesman Brian Rothenberg said. “This is not the last chapter of this story.”

And there’s just another example of what’s wrong with politics today. To Ohio State Democrats, it doesn’t matter that Wilson couldn’t get enough signatures (essentially, endorsements) to qualify. It doesn’t matter if the electorate doesn’t want Wilson. The Democrats will simply seek out and take advantage of whatever legal loopholes exist in order to get their guy on the ballot. And even if legal maneuvers don’t work, there are other “options”.

I wonder who will play the role of Fredo?

Dana Milbank of the Washington Post files a column today about Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito’s first day on the bench, which was yesterday. Instead of learning more about the intricacies of the cases themselves, Milbank decides it is more newsworthy to focus on Alito’s mannerisms. The piece is extremely condescending, to say the least. Here’s a sample:

– It was Samuel Alito’s first day of school yesterday, and the new Supreme Court justice demonstrated himself to be a precocious, if sometimes too enthusiastic, pupil.”

– In his first day on the bench, Alito laughed obligingly at Justice Antonin Scalia’s joke about river discharge. He stroked his chin thoughtfully and rocked in his chair, just as the more senior justices do.”

– He (Alito) tried to talk at the same time as 85-year-old Justice John Paul Stevens, then quickly backed down.”

– He forgot the rules of seniority and stepped in front of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg; the 72-year-old Clinton appointee was uninjured.”

And Milbank didn’t stop there. He continued with this second-by-second analysis of Alito’s movements.

As oral arguments started, Alito adopted a studious frown as the lawyer for a shopping-mall developer explained why the Clean Water Act didn’t apply to him. Within seconds, Scalia interrupted to declare his agreement with the builder. Ginsburg broke in to make clear her opposition. Then, without waiting for the other six, Alito jumped in.

“Does it make sense,” he wondered, that “a tributary that leads into navigable water is not necessarily covered?” Souter quickly agreed with Alito’s line of questioning, suggesting “evil polluters” were trying to evade the law.

It might have been an anxious moment for the new justice’s supporters. Was Alito, so recently championed by the right wing, siding with Ginsburg and Souter against Scalia? Or was he merely playing the devil’s advocate, as justices often do? Alito, resting his face in his left hand, his pinky on his lips, gave no further clues. For the next hour, he sat silently while his colleagues debated fiercely.

Stevens called an argument made by the property owners “sort of foolish.” Alito reached for his silver coffee mug. Scalia ridiculed the government argument that land “becomes water of the United States because there are puddles on it.” Alito scratched his head.

Alito found his voice in the second hearing, a less important dispute about discharge from dams. He shared a private joke with Ginsburg, apparently at the expense of a clearly nervous petitioner. After Kennedy and Chief Justice John Roberts asked questions, Alito piped up with a question — but quickly silenced himself when he discovered Stevens had the floor. He sipped from his mug, rested chin in hand, and bided his time — finally seizing the floor after a Breyer soliloquy.

Most people are interested in the Supreme Court for the decisions that are made regarding the specific cases that are brought before the judicial branch. Not Dana Milbank. He’s got one thing on his mind. It’s Sam Alito. How Sam looks. What Sam says. How Sam sits. How Sam stands.

What’s next Dana? A critique of Alito’s hygienic practices? Will we read about an errant nose hair or will it be a column focusing on the varied shapes of lint clinging to the Justice’s robe?

Nice work, Milbank. Now go get a life.

Just when we thought society was on the brink of disaster, Yahoo! liberates Allah.

Yahoo! has reversed its decision to stop people registering Yahoo! IDs which include the letters “allah”.

The Reg was contacted yesterday by a reader – Ed Callahan – who was having trouble registering his mum – Linda Callahan – for a Verizon email address – provided through a Yahoo! portal.

But Yahoo! got in touch with us this morning to say it is now accepting Yahoo! identities which contain the letters “allah”. The Callahans will be overjoyed.

Yahoo! said in a statement: “We continuously evaluate abuse patterns in registration usernames to help prevent spam, fraud and other inappropriate behavior. A small number of people registered for IDs using specific terms with the sole purpose of promoting hate, and then used those IDs to post content that was harmful or threatening to others, thus violating Yahoo!’s Terms of Service.

“‘Allah’ was one word being used for these purposes, with instances tied to defamatory language. We took steps to help protect our users by prohibiting use of the term in Yahoo! usernames. We recently re-evaluated the term ‘Allah’ and users can now register for IDs with this word because it is no longer a significant target for abuse. We regularly evaluate this type of activity and will continue to make adjustments to our registration process to help foster a positive customer experience.”

The ‘two minutes to midnight’ clock has stopped ticking, for now.

Previously: Yahoo! bans Allah

Since yesterday, more information has become available concerning the port deal, yet many questions remain about just how, when and why the deal was approved by the Bush administration. And the pressure continues, as Republicans, Democrats, Conservatives, Liberals, and the right and left sides of the blogosphere take part in the mob effect we’ve come to know so well. The pitchforks and flaming torches are marching down Pennsylvania Avenue. 

Today we learn something more – Bush wasn’t aware of the deal prior to the approval by his administration. One would believe that this information was released by White House PR people in the hopes that it might deflect attention from the president, and thereby divert the mob and quell discontent. But here’s the problem with that – Bush’s statement yesterday defending the deal and threatening to VETO any legislation brought to kill it. Combine the words of the president’s statement with the passion in which it was delivered, throw in a heavy dose of media-made theatrics, and one can’t help but walk away with the impression that Bush was fully engaged in the decision. It’s almost as if he was at the negotiation table, pushing the pen in front of representatives of Dubai Ports World.

It’s strange.

If I could ask Bush one question, it would be this: If the decision to contract with Dubai Ports World was made without your knowledge by members of your administration more than a month ago, how can you, as well as the American people, be sure that the deal was completely and thoroughly vetted from a national security perspective?

OK, one more general question: Why is Bush so adamant that this deal go through? Why threaten a VETO? He’s not used that pen at all during his presidency, even though there have been many opportunities for him to do so. Yet now, we’re supposed to believe that this deal is soooo important that Bush is willing to use his VETO powers for the first time to kill anything that attempts to block it. Why is the port deal such a critical issue for the president?

It’s strange.

Is this matter really just another example of poor communication within the Bush administration, or is there something more?

48% of youth aged 18 to 23 in South Korea would support North Korea if the US were to bomb key nuclear sites.

A South Korean political expert is quick to say that the poll results should not be interpreted as meaning that young South Koreans are anti-American. He believes they are pro-peace and are opposed to any armed conflict.

Yeah, OK, fine. I think there’s a deeper problem in South Korea, one that was highlighted by a discussion I had with a colleague of mine who lives there. He said the problem is the older generation hasn’t effectively taught the younger generation about their neighbors to the north. Teens either don’t know about or cannot relate to the experiences of real people who lived through the Korean War. They are far removed from that time, and as such, they don’t fear a future attack. They don’t fully appreciate how the regime in Pyongyang treats its inhabitants. They misjudge Kim Jong-il to be as reasonable as most other modern day leaders.

Perhaps worst of all, they take their freedom for granted. They don’t believe in the boogyman.

So, what should the US do? Should we continue to prepare to defend South Korea in the event that Kim goes nuts and starts his tanks a-rollin’? We know he already tells his people that North Korea is at war with the United States. He can launch a missile at any moment and claim he was provoked.

Should we worry about that?

Bill Quick says “Let ‘em Hang”. I’m not so sure.